Part I: Explain and evaluate (weigh the pros and cons) of one of the following arguments, saying why you think it makes sense or not:
1. The Samkhya argument for satkaryavada, the view that the effect must pre-exist in the cause.
2. The Nyaya philosopher Gotama’s proof of the plurality of the self.
3. The Jain’s anekantavada argument that everything is true because every perspective is valid.
4. The Mimamsa argument that unless a Vedic belief is overthrown by new knowledge it remains valid.
5. The Vedic argument that caste-based dharma (duty) is fair because it’s based on karma (from free will).
6. The Upanishad argument that being is eternal because it cannot have arisen from nonbeing.
Part II: Explain and evaluate (weigh the pros and cons) of one of the following beliefs/views, saying why you think it makes sense or not:
7. The Advaita Vedanta monist/non-dualist view that there’s One God, all is God, and all religions are true, as expressed by Radhakrishnan.
8. The Nyaya restriction of categories of valid inquiry to only those that lead to mok?a (freedom).
9. The Samkhya Karika claim that “nothing is really bound, no-one is reborn, no-one is released”.
10. Patanjali’s Yoga Sutra claim that yoga citta vritti nirodha (union is achieved by stopping mind-waves).
11. The Mimamsa epistemological claim that knowledge is self-validating, true, and automatically believed.
12. Shankara’s Advaita Vedanta, Madhva’s Dvaita Vedanta, or Ramanuja’s Vishishtadvaita Vedanta.

Click here to place an order  for a similar  paper  and have exceptional work done by our team and get A+results